In a writ petition challenging an allotment order, the petitioner sought withdrawal. Permission was granted, and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn without costs.
Permission to withdraw was accorded; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 17700 of 2008
Between:
Punjab National Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Sayeed Plaza, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad, rep.by its Senior Manager
... PETITIONER
AND
RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the provisional Allotment order passed by the 1st respondent dated 31.7.2008 bearing No.2849/MMRC/EMU/HUDA/90 in favour of 2nd respondent without considering the representations of the petitioner Bank dated 12.9.2007, 17.12.2007 etc as illegal, arbitrary and high handed and consequentially to direct the 1st respondent either to record the charge of the petitioner Bank in the said allotment order and to forward the original allotment order etc to the petitioner Bank or in the alternative to set aside the allotment order and to pay the present value of the Plot bearing No.18 HIG Mushk Mahal Residential Complex, Attapur, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District along with interest at 18% pa to the extent of the debt liability payable by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner Bank as per the Recovery certificate in OA.No.866/2001 on the file of the DRT , Hyderabad and to pay the surplus amount if any to the 2nd respondent.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.AMBADIPUDI SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: M.DHANANJAY REDDY (SC FOR HUDA)
The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO : 17700 of 2008
O R D E R:
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition.
Permission is accorded.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No
costs.
____________ G.ROHINI, J
2nd June 2009 Kh/PN
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Punjab National Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Sayeed Plaza, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad
Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA)
Yogesh @ Yogesh Sharma
G. ROHINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
